Police Officer Preparation & Law Enforcement Resource - Archive

Good day all,
what are your views on the 4th amendment? do you think if you have nothing to hide why not let the police check your car or place out or do you say thank God we have the 4th amendment and all the other amendments to protect all of us from the goverment.

The latter. I don't want anyone searching my car, house, etc. w/o good reason. I'd hate to live in a country where the police could do that.

That being said, if it's not terribly intrusive I'd let them look in some places if I think they have a reason to be concerned.

Good day all,
what are your views on the 4th amendment? do you think if you have nothing to hide why not let the police check your car or place out or do you say thank God we have the 4th amendment and all the other amendments to protect all of us from the goverment.

I am absolutely thankful for the 4th amendment protections we are given.

But I think that it's foolish to make a blanket decision (I will ALWAYS/NEVER allow the police to search my vehicle no matter what) based on some overarching principle.

The best way to go about it (IMHO) is to know your rights, and make an informed decision based on the circumstances on whether or not to waive them in each particular case.

-Citicop.

I would want to ask a LEO why he wants to search my PU truck or home if asked and then use my gut feeling if they are being truthfull but I dont think most cops would want to waist thier time with something unless they feel a crime has happen. I have found a hunting knife once in my truck I forgot about and if a search was done on a triffic stop i would of eneded up in jail

I've met a number of cops who fully believe in the "if you have nothing to hide why won't you let me search" philosophy. Many are the ones who will "stretch" for PC if the driver of a car refuses a consent search.

They honestly, truly don't think they are doing anything unethical, because they fully believe that an innocent person would have no trouble with a police search.

My stock question to them is always, "If Internal Affairs showed up at your house and asked for consent to search it from top to bottom and consent to mirror all the hard drives and external drives in every computer and cell phone, would you consent? If you wouldn't, what crimes are you hiding?"

I've never heard anyone say they would consent to a search like that by IA.

I think vehicle search laws should not be quite as strict as someone's home, but they are, at least here.To me the purpose of a car is to get from point A to point B. I don't think police should be allowed to search at will but the steps we have to go through here to do a consent search correctly are pretty ridiculous. If someone consents to a search of their car then you should be able to, period. With probable cause you should be able to search right there and not the tow the car, get a search warrant, etc. You can in some states, just not here. Well you can, but it's not considered a "best practice."

That is my take but all of that said I abide by the case law and such set forth. That is my job, my opinion doesn't mean jack.

Obviously, I've been out of the biz too long to give specifics anymore, but in Oregon vehicle search laws used to be more lax than houses because they were mobile. Has the SCOUS changed that?

But again, if I think the officer has reason to be suspicious I might give limited consent to search, but I'm not going to tolerate a fishing expedition.

Obviously, I've been out of the biz too long to give specifics anymore, but in Oregon vehicle search laws used to be more lax than houses because they were mobile. Has the SCOUS changed that?

But again, if I think the officer has reason to be suspicious I might give limited consent to search, but I'm not going to tolerate a fishing expedition.

Well PA has its own constitution so we are much stricter than any federal decisions. It's all about the defendant here.

Well PA has its own constitution so we are much stricter than any federal decisions. It's all about the defendant here.

Oregon's is more restrictive too, but it still gives (at least used to) us a little more latitude with a vehicle capable of being moved. But if I had enough PC, I could tow the car and get the warrant if the person refused to cooperate. That took out the "I said, he said" from a court hearing about the consent.

I believe the bill of rights is more to protect the people from the goverment rather than what we have the right to do. I also believe if is was not for the the Untied states the world will be a worse place for all

Good day all,
what are your views on the 4th amendment? do you think if you have nothing to hide why not let the police check your car or place out or do you say thank God we have the 4th amendment and all the other amendments to protect all of us from the goverment.

Not a LEO but the purpose of the 4th amendment is that it gives the choice of search back to the citizen. I can choose whether to let the police search or not. I am not violating the 4th amendment by allowing a search. It's never the executive branches sole choice to search either, except under very narrow circumstances.

To RDS, Arizona vs. Gant is a recent decision I thought that narrowed the search of vehicles incident to an arrest. As I recall, the result is that the car is impounded and "inventoried" as opposed to "searched" if PC for search is lacking but an arrest is made. Oregon and Pennsylvania may have already been stricter than AZ so YMMV if it actually changed anything.

Arizona v. Gant specified that if you arrest an occupant of the car, and you have probable cause to believe that a search of the vehicle will yield additional evidence for the crime for which you are arresting the person, you can search.

You can no longer auotmatically search the whole car incident to arrest.

Arizona v. Gant specified that if you arrest an occupant of the car, and you have probable cause to believe that a search of the vehicle will yield additional evidence for the crime for which you are arresting the person, you can search.

You can no longer auotmatically search the whole car incident to arrest.

Just curious, did that change procedures for you in Connecticut or was Connecticut law/constitution stricter than the ruling?

To the OP, the majority of LEO's only ask to search when they believe there is contraband etc. in your vehicle or house. I am sure there are a few out there that do it because they are "fishing", but I don't know of too many Cops that want to waste their time and effort just "to do it".

I believe in the Constitution and I took an oath to uphold it.

I personally would not want my vehicle or house to be searched, becuase its my property and I enjoy my privacy. I also have NOTHING to hide, so if asked I would consent.

On the other hand, I have NEVER been in the position where LE has had any reason to ask. Its not because I am LE, its because I don't break the law and have never put myself if any situation to be asked for consent.

My point is, if you don't break the law, LE will have no reason to even ask for consent to search in the first place!

My point is, if you don't break the law, LE will have no reason to even ask for consent to search in the first place!

Yep. Which is why I said if some officer asks to search anything of mine, it's probably a fishing expedition. However, if I was told that I matched the description of some old guy that did something, I might consent to something limited. But I'm going to ask what he's specifically looking for and we will define the limits of the search. Or I might not, depending on my read of the cop. If I get the idea that he/she's fairly professional I'd be more likely than if it's someone with a bit too much enthusiasm. You know the type.

But I'm so glad I live in a country where I have the right to refuse. In most countries on this earth, it's not an option.

So how would that effect rv trailers and mobile homes? Are they considered the same as cars because they are mobile, but if an elderly couple are "snow birding" then isn't that camper their residence? I was just curious I know rv s are exempted from open container laws for instance in my state, but do any states have provisions about searches of recreational vehicles?

I'm more on the side of refusing consent searches, because I never really know for sure what they're looking for. I would answer an officers questions but not allow a search it would suck if a hitch hiker dropped something illegal or whatever. Another reason is, if you truly have nothing to hide, then wouldn't allowing a search be a waste of the officers time? Of course this is all academic because I obey traffic laws and generally don't make a habit of being a criminal so I actually don't have much contact with LE outside of a "good morning" or something like that if I happen to pass one while going about my day

I'm more on the side of refusing consent searches, because I never really know for sure what they're looking for. I would answer an officers questions but not allow a search it would suck if a hitch hiker dropped something illegal or whatever. Another reason is, if you truly have nothing to hide, then wouldn't allowing a search be a waste of the officers time? Of course this is all academic because I obey traffic laws and generally don't make a habit of being a criminal so I actually don't have much contact with LE outside of a "good morning" or something like that if I happen to pass one while going about my day

Really?!?!? Pick up hitchhikers that often eh?? I'd be more fearful of that than letting the police search m car.

Isn't it up to the officer to determine what is a waste of their time? I've searched cars with consent and turned up nothing. I don't consider it a waste of time.

Really?!?!? Pick up hitchhikers that often eh?? I'd be more fearful of that than letting the police search m car.

Isn't it up to the officer to determine what is a waste of their time? I've searched cars with consent and turned up nothing. I don't consider it a waste of time.

Well I will pickup hitchhikers on occasion. Ive done it 8 to 9 times in the last year. Half of them were elderly people on the same snowy day thumbing a ride to and from the grocery store I was working at at the time. They looked like they needed help and so I took them where they needed to go in my chained up minivan. The other 3 were unique cases mostly involving people I knew. Still you never know if someone might be up to something dirty. Best not find out the hard way. I do however completely search the car after letting them off. Another factor is otherwise lawful actions that SOME officers may not appreciate. For instance a police officer came to my high school awhile ago, gave a big safety talk, said it is illegal for someone under 21 to have a handgun in their vehicle or person under any circumstances. But the law of my state says otherwise, it says I can carry a handgun in my car in a locked hard sided case unloaded and can possess one at a shooting range or while hiking in public forests. Obviously consenting to a search by this officer while coming home from the range or a hike in the Olympic mountains would be bad idea. (I later asked a county deputy just to e sure that my taking a revolver to the range was legal, he said that it was and so did the state police after I emailed them.)


I don't know, I really don't know how consenting to a search if there's nothing for you to find helps you. Now if you say step out of the vehicle so I can search it. I will not resist in any way or stick a camera in your face and rattle off case law and compare you to a storm trooper like most of those YouTube guys do. But I feel a right to basic privacy in my affairs if I'm not doing anything wrong

one other reason I don't like searches, you are a cop not my butler, a friend of mine got search by police, all his neatly folded clothes in a suitcase were thrown In a clump and his dry cleaning tossed in that clump from the hanger it was on, another case was dumped into his trunk, with his laptop getting a free fall. And for what? He had no contraband. See If going somewhere I don't want my luggage uprooted, nor my dry cleaning wrinkled.

and of course that brings us to everyone's favorite vague law, burglary tools. See any normal flat head screw driver picked up at scott mclendons hardware for 8 bucks can get you a gross misdemeanor, whatever you do don't carry a crow bar in your car after dark. Or I'm taking my slim Jim kit to a friend who locked himself out and doesn't want to pay 70 dollars for tow truck service. What if when you pull up the tarp on the bed of my truck I have a gas can of red dyed diesel and a few bags of fertilizer? My story is I'm headin to my uncles farm in mill creek to do farm work, diesel for the tractor and fertilizer for the tomatoes, but these are also bomb making ingredients, what would your reaction be? Sometimes innocent behavior is seen as suspicous. I under stand that you guys are honest people doing an honest job, and I have no beef with that. But I also don't want to be the victim of a mis understanding. The founders understood this and that's why we have a 4th amendment. Just to clarify, and I do apologize if I've sounded this way. I'm in no way implying corruption or complaining about how police do their jobs, I'm simply making the case for why I would lean on the side of not giving consent to a search.

You have a right to be free from searches unless the officer has obtained a warrant signed by a detached and neutral magistrate, or unless the situation falls into one of the seven exceptions to the search warrant requirement.

You are never required to agree to a consent search. That's all there is to it.

LOL
Unfortunately, the OP seems to be watching a lot of television... and has an unusually high number of hitchikers in his vicinity.

The bottom line is that you got your answer. We (LE) have no issue with the 4th Amendment and we follow it, accordingly. I don't care if it is your car, RV, house or whatever. We tend to ask for your consent. If you give it, we search. If you do not, we don't search. IF we feel we need to search without your consent, we get a warrant (except in special circumstances). There is nothing complicated about it.

I liken this to asking about our opinion on gun laws. Most of the guys I know are all for gun ownership by law abiding citizens. However, depending on what state we are in, we have to follow the law and not our opinion. So, our opinion of the 4th Amendment is of little consequence. I know I enjoy my rights against unreasonable searches.

As a side note, there was a study done many years ago (and don't ask, as I don't remember who did it) on consent searches. Contrary to common sense, even when possessing contraband (guns, drugs, dead bodies, etc) the ratio of people giving consent to search is no different than those with nothing to hide. Odd... but works well for me. :)

Actually roadrunner was the OP I just wanted to ask an accompanying question and give my $00.02 but I think my question is answered well. Thank you very much.

just as to your last statement, I once watched an episode of cops in which the officer pulls over a teenage girl, he finishes the stop and gives the girl her ticket, then her asks if he can search the car, and the officer then explains she has the right to refuse the search and leave that she is entirely free to go, she says yes and all sorts of drugs come out of that car during the search.... LOL

........they fully believe that an innocent person would have no trouble with a police search.

My stock question to them is always, "If Internal Affairs showed up at your house and asked for consent to search it from top to bottom and consent to mirror all the hard drives and external drives in every computer and cell phone, would you consent? If you wouldn't, what crimes are you hiding?"

I've never heard anyone say they would consent to a search like that by IA.

This is a great point to bring up in a discussion, I may use this next time I have a Constitution discussion in RL, lol.

It's funny how your views change. Before I became a LEO (and into the first few months Policing), I always thought "if you have nothing to hide - why not consent?" but the more you read about history, the Constitution, etc.....and honestly the older you get, the more you value the freedoms we have been granted.

The 4th Amendment was extremely relevant to the Framers, having experienced the British Crown's power to issue "General Warrants" that pretty much granted legal authorities permission to search any house, at any time, for any reason (or no reason). The colonists had even less protections to their home than their brethren in England.

There is a reason we have that right, and being a person who values his family's privacy - I cherish it. I will always try to help LEO's with things even if it includes searching my property, BUT as others have said, it depends on the situation, the LEO/agency I'm dealing with, and how it is asked.

On related subject, that being the 5th Amendment, a good YouTube video of a lecture by a University Law Professor is here....
6wXkI4t7nuc

No biggie. If by your actions or inactions, you resist, obstruct or delay me in the performance of my duties, you're going to jail. In addition, if I have probable cause to arrest you, I don't care if you talk to me or not, you're still going to jail.

Btw, I only watched a few minutes of that video - long enough for me to get sick of him and his fast talking mouth. And, regarding the story he related about the he said/she said incident where the woman claimed the guy choked her and the guy denied putting hands on her at all but made the comment to the responding police officer that he had in fact put his hands on her as a joke... and this yahoo says we'll never know the truth and that the guy should have never said anything to begin with... bullsh1t, I'll bet everything I own the guy was dirty AND did put his hands on her.

fuc& this guy and all the attorneys like him who are only interested in getting their clients off (or prosecuted even) - no matter how - they don't care jack sh1t about the TRUTH... except if/when the TRUTH becomes known and it makes it harder for them to defend their clients...

Yep. I used to tell people, I get paid the same whether you talk to me or not. But this is your first chance to give your side of the story. If you choose not to, then I just go on what I see and what other people tell me.

I put a man in jail for murder once when I sort of thought it might have been self defense, but his lawyer neighbor told him not to talk to me. W/o any explanation from him, I had limited info to go on so I had to book him. Later, through other means I was able to ascertain that it was self defense and he was released, but someone who had never been in trouble in his life spent a couple of nights in jail for no good reason other than he listened to his lawyer neighbor.

A few problems with his spiel, and yesihave watched the entire video plus the second half in which a police officer finishes the lecture....

1) the hypothetical officers in the professors scenario don care about innocence or guilt, one can browse RDS's postings, I think it's obvious that he cares about making sure the right guy and not just anyone is convicted, im sure most detectives care about putting the right guy behind bars
2) it's overly simplistic, he makes it seem that if you just clam up they can never convict you. Not quite
3) in some cases like self defense, your defense in court. Hinges on you confessing to the killing and convincing police, judges, and airy that you were in danger when you fired. To credibly do this you must call the cops after a self defense incident and be able to articulate on the scene why you felt deadly force was nessecary. Professor Duane says nothing about that scenario. Also if you know of the existence of exonerating evidence to you, telling investigators about it sooner rather then later is likely in your best interests.

not a policeman, but I have studied the court system and even go down to the county court house and watch trials and arraignments at least once per week. So I do have some insight on how prosecutors and attorneys make their arguments and what assumptions are made

Im not a LEO but I would not like the Idea of anyone I dont know looking around my stuff but I would feel I would not get a warning and get the ticket if I refused a search. I been stopped 6 times by troopers in the last year and never been asked for a search. the troopers always say sorry I stopped and delayed you have a good day you are frre to go

A really good way to avoid that is to obey the traffic laws. If you do that, you don't have to worry about getting a ticket.

that is true retdetsgt I guess all the times I have been stopped the troopers must just look at me and know that I obey laws and it will be waisting thier time to seach my delivery truck.

I recently (like this week) finished a Constitutional Law class taught by a police officer and he suggested never letting anyone search your car or your home unless they have a warrant. Pretty much for all of the reasons already stated a screwdriver could be a "burglary tool" and a sandwich bag could be "drug paraphanelia". Personally, I am just not comfortable with anyone going through my stuff period. I like the IA analogy...that's pretty good and I'll bet you wouldn't find many people who would say sure!

I recently (like this week) finished a Constitutional Law class taught by a police officer and he suggested never letting anyone search your car or your home unless they have a warrant. Pretty much for all of the reasons already stated a screwdriver could be a "burglary tool" and a sandwich bag could be "drug paraphanelia". Personally, I am just not comfortable with anyone going through my stuff period. I like the IA analogy...that's pretty good and I'll bet you wouldn't find many people who would say sure!

To me a screwdriver is a screwdriver unless you have other things that may make me think it's a burglary tool.

Same with a sandwich bag. If there's bread crumbs in it and you charge someone with drug paraphernalia you are a moron, sorry. It goes back to common sense.

And it never ceases to amaze me how potheads don't realize how potent the odor of marijuana really is and how easy it is to smell it. I've had full fledged colds and can still smell it plain as day.

For me it completely depends on why and when.

Recently we've had a blue or silver 80's early 90's style cadillac sedan shooting up cars, houses, and robbing places with a shotgun. We came across a light blue 91 cadillac driving right through the center of the area where this is happening. When we explained why we wanted to search his car, he was fine with it, as he lived in the neighborhood where this was going on, and he wanted us to catch the guys as bad as we did.

In that situation, a known crime spree, and documented in the media that a vehicle similar to mine was used, I'd have no problem with the police searching my car.

On a run of the mill traffic stop, it would depend on where I'm going and what my schedule was. If I'm just out for a run to the store, I'd probably let them. If I was on a schedule, probably not.

Recently we've had a blue or silver 80's early 90's style cadillac sedan shooting up cars, houses, and robbing places with a shotgun. We came across a light blue 91 cadillac driving right through the center of the area where this is happening. When we explained why we wanted to search his car, he was fine with it, as he lived in the neighborhood where this was going on, and he wanted us to catch the guys as bad as we did.

In that situation, a known crime spree, and documented in the media that a vehicle similar to mine was used, I'd have no problem with the police searching my car.


This would be the Catch-22 scenario if it was me. On the one hand, I know you are wasting your time searching my car. I also realize that you don't know that until you do search.

So the first officer that requests to search after a traffic stop would get to scour it top to bottom.

But if somehow the results of his stop and search don't get passed on/logged and it's the fifth traffic stop in 5 days between 4 different agencies because the car still matches the description, I'd be a tad reluctant to allow the search again just because it's a waste of time (and probably even upset that I got pulled over again).

The 6th traffic stop officer might just get to see spent shotgun casings in plain view on the front seat just to get him all excited :).

When I worked uniform with a partner, a young traffic cop asked for backup. We responded and he had stopped this old black man driving a beat up Buick. The kid said the he had gotten permission to search the car from the driver. That was back when old black people rarely refused anything cops asked them to do.

My partner and I talked to the old guy while the kid tossed the car and there was no reason we could think of why he would want to search it. It was apparent to me that he was doing it only because he could. I'll never forget my partner looking at the young cop going through the trunk and saying, "There's nothing more nauseating than unbridled enthusiasm." So true.